In an era where chemical, biological or nuclear attacks at one or more locations either globally or within a country or region are possible, it is desirable to have a detection system capable of locating and identifying the type of attack so that a rapid preemptive response can be initiated. Such attacks can occur both as a result of enemy or terrorist activity and as a result of a chemical, biological or nuclear accident at a domestic facility. In such cases, a prompt response with medical treatment will tend to minimize injury and loss of life.
Sensors exist which will detect various chemical and biological agents as well as nuclear radiation, but these sensors are impractical because several thousands are required for effective use in a global, national, regional, or even local detection system. Sensors have been effectively used to detect hazardous airborne agent attacks on very limited areas, such as buildings or compounds, but a problem still remains as to how an attack occurring in a large area, such as a city, state, country, continent or even the world, can effectively and rapidly be identified. To this point, as illustrated by U.S. Pat. No. 5,278,539 to Lauterbach et al., and U.S. Pat. No. 5,576,952 to Stutman et al., hazardous material and medical alerts have originated from small, specific locations or from specific, affected individuals.
There is a need to coordinate and integrate preparedness efforts against chemical, biological and nuclear terrorism into a regional or nationwide preemptive sensor-based detection system. Of particular concern are weaponized and/or contagious biological agents. The current state of the biodefense industry is focused on obtaining data of ongoing signs and symptoms throughout the country—so called “syndromic detection.” The thought is that when abnormal patterns emerge (e.g., possibly indicative of a bioattack) mitigation and prevention strategies could ensue much earlier than before and hence the outcome is improved. However, this fundamental model is flawed and represents essentially little change from the response paradigms of the previous centuries. This is still an after-the-fact reactive approach providing too little too late. Upon analyzing the best possible outcomes using this current methodology, the death and illness rates are still horrible and unacceptable. Such outcomes can be thwarted if a preemptive sensor-based detection system is employed.
The present invention has been developed in view of the foregoing.